What is the difference between archeology and defacing a tomb?

score:2

Accepted answer

The difference between archeology and looting a tomb is based, today, on two points:

  • First, in archaeology people don't expect to make money directly out of the opening of the tombs: they won't take what's inside and sell it. Instead, they will take it and give it to a museum, that will expect some profit from showing this to tourists
  • Second, in archaeology you open the tomb with precaution, to minimize damages, and you don't destroy what's inside. Plus, you're trying to know more from the discovery of the tomb. Contrary to looters that will destroy the tomb by opening it and take only the gold

These are the theoretical differences. Now, you could object that taking objects out of a tomb and showing them in a museum is a kind of "making money by looting the tomb". And opening the tomb is still a sacrilege in some religions. That is why we must consider historical reasons:

Archaeology started by opening tombs that were of no more importance to contemporaries: nobody honored Old Egypt's Gods or Pharaohs in the 20th century when English archaeologists opened them. Not even contemporary Egyptians. So that is why the motive of knowing more about Old Egypt and showing objects in museums was accepted by nearly everyone by the time. Evenmore, opening contemporary tombs (let's said Georges Washington's tomb) would of no help in knowing more about the Independance War. Later on, even tombs that were erected on the basis of contemporary values were opened on the motive of archaeology: that is, for example, Polish Christian Kings' tombs were opened in contemporary Christian Poland.

More post

Search Posts

Related post